They still exist, and have slotted fairly comfortably into a web enabled role... it turns out that batch mode terminals and web pages are rather similar, and as a result it's only a few years since IBM sold a record number of mainframes in one year.

Although it's worth taking this with a grain of salt the size of Uluru, IBM did claim to have shipped the most mainframe processing capacity ever per quarter in 4th quarter of 2012. Exactly how they calculate this is not entirely clear to me, but either way they are still selling a lot of kit and it doesn't seem to be slowing down.

Two of my favorite IBM PC games!!

IBM: Hey, buy this thing! If we ever have to use it, it's the start of World War III, but hell, we made money off World War II so it won't be ALL bad!

My progression was.....
Commodore 64 (1983),
Atari520ST (1987),
Atari 1040ST (1987), (Hard drive!)
IBM PC/AT (1988),
Macintosh 2 (1990),
80486 66DX2, (1992),
Pentium overdrive for the 486DX2 (1995),
Dual Pentium MMX 166 (1996) ,
Pentium-2 333mhz (1998), (Dual voodoo-2)
Pentium-3 800mhz (2000),
Pentium D 2.8gz ( 2006),
Core i7-920 ( 2009),
Core i7-970 (2011).

Lesser machines along the way... a Macintosh SE I cant place on the timeline. My biggest regret was sticking with the Pentium-3 for so long. Wasn't so interested though.

I'd change the cabinet meeting room a bit.
~Replace seats with sensory deprivation chambers
~Replace the cabinet with the IBM Gene/Q "Mira, a 10 peta-flop supercomputer, and name it Woodrow.
~Turn the basketball court into a miniature horse arena tended by a newly-appointed staff of performers from Cirque Du Soleil
The new color motif for the White house would be using the following HTML colors339
9FF 99C
CFF CCC
CFF CC9
9FF 996
6CC 663
399 330
066 990
0CC CC0
0CC
00F
F33 33F
F66 009
933 00C
C66 33F
F99 99F
FFF 99C
CCC 006
6CC 669
9CC 999
9FF 999
9CC 993
3FF 660
0CC 660
099 CC3
3FF CC0
0FF
00F
F66 66F
F99 33C
C66 009
966 66F
FFF 66C
CCC 669
999 003
366 336
699 666
6FF 666
6CC 666
699 330
099 993
3CC CC6
6FF 990
0FF

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by TheSluiceGate.

I'd like to see other platforms like IBM PCs, Apple 2, Atari 2600, etc.

>> ^ReverendTed:

dead


Boo. I couldn't find a replacement.

>> ^messenger:

I haven't played a console since SNES. What I liked about them then was that they always worked and never ever crashed. PCs still crash. Do consoles crash now? If not, that would be a significant advantage they have over PCs.


I haven't had owned a video game console since Atari 2600. I did borrow a Turbo Graphx 16 for about a week at my grand(ma/mother)'s house. I am more of a computer gamer with Texas Instrument (TI) 99/4A, Apple //c, IBM PCs, etc. Yes, computers crash a lot except for Apple //c and TI 99/4A since they were mostly the same like video game consoles.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

O double dragon, you were so impossibly hard. Time to go back, and finish you! This one and little Nemo train stage drove me insane as a kid.


Yea, the game was hard/difficult. I was playing on my old IBM PS/2 model 30 286 10 Mhz PC! I think it was in ugly EGA!

>> ^shuac:

Very true. And while all technology products are derivative of earlier products to some degree, I think Microsoft does more bandwagon-jumping than most. Let's look at the evidence.
Java, made by Sun. "Reimagined" by Microsoft.
Console gaming, made by Atari, Nintendo, Sega, Sony, et al. Microsoft gives us Xbox.
Online Music, pioneered by Napster, made legitimate by Apple. Microsoft gives us MSN Music.
MP3 player, pioneered by Rio, made super popular by Apple. Microsoft gives us Zune.
Internet search, pioneered by Archie in 1990, made insanely profitable by Google. Microsoft gives us MSN. And Live Search. And Bing.
Far as tablet computing goes, Microsoft actually has a much bigger history than Apple. I remember MS peddling tablets back in 2001 with XP. Trouble is, XP was never designed as a touch interface. Even as recent as 2008, Microsoft tried this strategy with the Origami.
The innovation Apple made is to take its smartphone OS (whose design is based on touch) and pull it up to the tablet rather than take a full-blown desktop OS and push it down. This is the idea Microsoft is copying with Surface and Windows 8.
Other than Kinect, which is an innovative product since it is more than merely a response to the Wii, I'm not sure Microsoft invented anything. Even its flagship Office suite is based on earlier software (WordStar, WordPerfect, dBase, Lotus 1-2-3). In fact, when Microsoft first licensed MS-DOS to IBM for a huge profit back in 1981, it was essentially QDOS, which they purchased outright from some guy for $50,000. Deal of the century.
You may say, "Well Apple didn't invent the MP3 player. Why aren't they guilty of copying too?"
They are. But Microsoft's history is rife with this sort of "me-too" thing in a way no other company's is. Let me distil my point into one sentence: How many companies are copying Microsoft's products?
To sum up: Microsoft is slim on innovation, fat on looking over the shoulders of the smart kids in class...>> ^Sarzy:
>> ^mtadd:
Microsoft never fails to innovate their name on someone else's product.

Yes, because the iPad was, of course, the first tablet ever.



Cool story bro.

No, seriously though, you do raise some interesting arguments. The only point I was trying to make is that it seems a bit reductionist to dismiss the Surface as merely an iPad clone, when it seems like Microsoft is legitimately trying to do some interesting things with it and Windows 8, rather than just jumping on the iPad bandwagon.

Very true. And while all technology products are derivative of earlier products to some degree, I think Microsoft does more bandwagon-jumping than most. Let's look at the evidence.

* Java, made by Sun. "Reimagined" by Microsoft.
* Console gaming, made by Atari, Nintendo, Sega, Sony, et al. Microsoft gives us Xbox.
* Online Music, pioneered by Napster, made legitimate by Apple. Microsoft gives us MSN Music.
* MP3 player, pioneered by Rio, made super popular by Apple. Microsoft gives us Zune.
* Internet search, pioneered by Archie in 1990, made insanely profitable by Google. Microsoft gives us MSN. And Live Search. And Bing.

Far as tablet computing goes, Microsoft actually has a much bigger history than Apple. I remember MS peddling tablets back in 2001 with XP. Trouble is, XP was never designed as a touch interface. Even as recent as 2008, Microsoft tried this strategy with the Origami.

The innovation Apple made is to take its smartphone OS (whose design is based on touch) and pull it up to the tablet rather than take a full-blown desktop OS and push it down. This is the idea Microsoft is copying with Surface and Windows 8.

Other than Kinect, which is an innovative product since it is more than merely a response to the Wii, I'm not sure Microsoft invented anything. Even its flagship Office suite is based on earlier software (WordStar, WordPerfect, dBase, Lotus 1-2-3). In fact, when Microsoft first licensed MS-DOS to IBM for a huge profit back in 1981, it was essentially QDOS, which they purchased outright from some guy for $50,000. Deal of the century.

You may say, "Well Apple didn't invent the MP3 player. Why aren't they guilty of copying too?"

They are. But Microsoft's history is rife with this sort of "me-too" thing in a way no other company's is. Let me distil my point into one sentence: How many companies are copying Microsoft's products?

To sum up: Microsoft is slim on innovation, fat on looking over the shoulders of the smart kids in class...>> ^Sarzy:

>> ^mtadd:
Microsoft never fails to innovate their name on someone else's product.

Yes, because the iPad was, of course, the first tablet ever.

Tape/Disable/Disconnect the camera?

Not sure how to do that with internal mic though. I don't have a webcam and mic on my IBM PCs for that reason.

>> ^darkrowan:

Uhm... ok so in searching for the original "Powers of 10" video, which is the name that eludes you @ant, I hit up on this vid. Does this make it a dupe? The other vid is there in response to the original, which was narrated rather than a music video.
>> ^ant:
>> ^kir_mokum:
this isn't a fan made video. i'm pretty sure it's a public domain science education video. DJ shadow use to use it for his live performances. very cool video though.

Yeah, I can't remember its video name. It had no music IIRC.



I would say a dupe. I think you show throw this to SiftTalk.

Uhm... ok so in searching for the original "Powers of 10" video, which is the name that eludes you @ant, I hit up on this vid. Does this make it a dupe? The other vid is there in response to the original, which was narrated rather than a music video.
>> ^ant:

>> ^kir_mokum:
this isn't a fan made video. i'm pretty sure it's a public domain science education video. DJ shadow use to use it for his live performances. very cool video though.

Yeah, I can't remember its video name. It had no music IIRC.